On 14 March 2014 14:37 Philipp Zabel wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Am Freitag, den 14.02.2014, 16:43 +0000 schrieb Lee Jones:
>> > From: Opensource [Steve Twiss] <stwiss.opensou...@diasemi.com>
>> >
>> > Add the correct silicon variant code ID (0x5) to the driver. This
>> > new code is the 'production' variant code ID for DA9063.
>> >
>> > This patch will remove the older variant code ID which matches the
>> > pre-production silicon ID (0x3) for the DA9063 chip.
>> >
>> > There is also some small amount of correction done in this patch:
>> > it splits the revision code and correctly names it according to
>> > the hardware specification and moves the dev_info() call before
>> > the variant ID test.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Opensource [Steve Twiss] <stwiss.opensou...@diasemi.com>
>>
>> Applied, thanks.
>
>we have a few i.MX6 Modules (imx6q-phytec-pfla02) with DA9063 PMICs that
>all report the model/revision ID as 0x61/0x03. Those are marked as
>follows:
> dialog DA9063 44 1240EHDA
> dialog DA9063 44 1312ECAF
>We now have received a report from Phytec that those PMICs were not
>marketed as preproduction in any way, but as a normal mask revision.
I will speak with our AEs this morning and try and get an answer to this one.
>Their Dialog Semiconductor contact talked about AD, BA, and BB silicon
>variants. How do those relate to the variant register value and to the
>markings on the chips?
>There seems to be a serious miscommunication somewhere.
Regards,
Steve
N�����r��y����b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{����zX����ܨ}���Ơz�&j:+v�������zZ+��+zf���h���~����i���z� �w���?�����&�)ߢf��^jǫy�m��@A�a���
0��h���i
